David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
The relevant alternatives approach in epistemology1 arose some years ago partly out of the hope to be able to reconcile our ordinary claims of knowledge with our inability to answer the skeptic. It was supposed to give rise to an account of knowledge according to which our ordinary claims of knowledge are true, even though the claims about our lack of knowledge that the skeptics make in one of their more persuasive moments are also true. To know, according to such an account, is to have evidence sufficient to rule out all the relevant alternatives. In ordinary life few alternatives are relevant. For example, whether or not we are brains in a vat is not a relevant alternative that we have to be able to rule out. In the debate with the skeptic it may become relevant, and accordingly we might not know something any more then, even though we have the same evidence as in ordinary life. The skeptics cleverly make more and more alternatives relevant, and that is how they succeed. But their success in the philosophy seminar is no threat to our ordinary claims of knowledge, or so the theory goes.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library||
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Keith DeRose (2006). "Bamboozled by Our Own Words": Semantic Blindness and Some Arguments Against Contextualism. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 73 (2):316 - 338.
Duncan Pritchard (2010). Relevant Alternatives, Perceptual Knowledge and Discrimination. Noûs 44 (2):245-268.
Franck Lihoreau (2008). Relevant Alternatives Contextualism and Ordinary Contingent Knowledge. Disputatio 2 (24):281-294.
John MacFarlane (2011). Relativism and Knowledge Attributions. In Duncan Pritchard & Sven Bernecker (eds.), The Routledge Companion to Epistemology. Routledge. 536--544.
James Pryor (2004). Comments on Sosa's “Relevant Alternatives, Contextualism Included”. Philosophical Studies 119 (1-2):67-72.
Matjaž Potrč & Vojko Strahovnik (2006). Justification in Context. Acta Analytica 20 (9):91-104.
Anthony Brueckner (1994). The Shifting Content of Knowledge Attributions. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 54 (1):123-126.
Jonathan Schaffer (2001). Knowledge, Relevant Alternatives and Missed Clues. Analysis 61 (3):202–208.
Ram Neta (2003). Contextualism and the Problem of the External World. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 66 (1):1–31.
Palle Yourgrau (1983). Knowledge and Relevant Alternatives. Synthese 55 (2):175 - 190.
Added to index2009-03-19
Total downloads38 ( #47,982 of 1,100,079 )
Recent downloads (6 months)6 ( #51,435 of 1,100,079 )
How can I increase my downloads?